________________
Notes
137
an independent organ of knowledge but are included in the inference has been raised by the Vaiseșikas. (Prasastapāda bhāsya, p. 576).
P. 19. L. 9-10. The definition of scripture (Agama) given here is subjective. According to this definition the first authenticity goes to the Tirthankaras, the second to the ganadharas and the third to the Acāryas. The primary authenticity goes to the scriptures, whose ideas are those of the Tirthankaras and words those of the Ganadharas. Other scriptures, whose ideas originated from Ganadharas and their disciples, are of secondary authenticity; their authenticity depending on their coherence with the scriptures of primary authenticity just as the authenticity of Smộtis in Hinduism depends on their coherence with the Srutis.
Besides this objective criteria of the authenticity of the scripture there is subjective criteria also which has been explained in the text (p. 7, L. 12-14) and notes on it.
P. 19. para 62. It appears that the authenticity of faina scriptures is believed to be somewhat of an object nature. It is the relativity of the statements, which make it authentic because the nature of the things is such that they are not possessed of any absolute characteristic. Gommaļasāra (Karmakānda, 895) says that the non-faina scriptures are wrong as their intention is to attribute absolute characteristics whereas the Jaina scriptures are right because they attribute non-absolute quality to an object. Yasovijaya emphatically asserts that any statement is correct only when it is seven-fold. Such statement is made from a particular point of view and yet it does not lose sight of the fact that statements can be made from other angles also. Thus all statements are impliedly relative even though they may not be so explicitly.
P. 19. L. 18. Dalsukha Bhai Malanniya in his book Āgama yuga kā Jaina darśana (pp.94-114) has traced the origin of the seven-fold statement. The Nasadiya Sukta (Rgveda 10. 121) has spoken of the state before creation as neither existent nor non-existent. It is a statement in which the origin of seven-fold statement can be partially traced. The statement like 'it moves and it moves not' (Isopani sad, 5) clearly proves that the thinkers of the Upanişads were conscious of
